Somebody arrested the producer of the scandalous video “The Innocence of Muslims.” Whoever did this could have stayed his hand. That was a stupid or a malevolent thing to do. There is zero doubt that thousands of ignorant Muslims will think that their protests bore fruit. There is no telling them that the guy was arrested for something else. For people who live in mendacious societies it sounds like a transparent lie. The arrest is encouragement to rioting, assault and murder. The act also seems to validate the belief, widespread around the Muslim world, that blasphemy is a crime or should be treated as such.

Whoever gave the order to arrest the guy is a moron or a criminal, I don’t care how many unpaid traffic tickets the guy has . It would have been easy enough to wait two weeks to arrest him. It’s not as if he was going to flee to Egypt, for instance. The dark, suspicious part of me wonders if the arrester has thought about the fact that there are many Muslims in American jails and prisons. Some have little to lose if they gain fame by killing the blasphemer.

I learned later that the person who gave the order to arrest the video producer is a federal judge. I don’t know how anything federal became involved. It might even have been legitimate. It makes the whole sorry episode significantly worse though. Muslim fanatics riot against “America;” “America” arrests the culprit.

By the way, here is a quiz:

A. What was the name of Prophet Mohammed’s favorite wife?

B. How old was she when he consummated his marriage with her? (That’s “consummated,” not “contracted.”)

Use only legitimate Muslim sources to answer.

Share this:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

About Jacques Delacroix

I write short stories, current events comments, and sociopolitical essays, mostly in English, some in French. There are other people with the same first name and same last name on the Internet. I am the one who put up on Amazon in 2014: "I Used to Be French: an Immature Autobiography" and also: "Les pumas de grande-banlieue." To my knowledge, I am the only Jacques Delacroix with American and English scholarly publications. In a previous life, I was a teacher and a scholar in Organizational Theory and in the Sociology of Economic Development. (Go ahead, Google me!) I live in the People’s Green Socialist Republic of Santa Cruz, California.

Well she may have ended up as his favorite since he watched her grow from a child into a woman of political and social standing under his influence and serving his purpose. Who knows? I certainly don’t. History in not always as accurate as we want it to be. Do you happen to know the accurate answer?

well…according to the excellent and traditional Islamic source…wikipedia…it claims that it was “Aisha who became known as Muhammad’s favourite wife in Sunni tradition.” He reportedly married her when she was of six years of age. and consummated the marriage when she started puberty at age 9/10/11/15-24 (depending on who one specifically sources; more specifically how close to the present day the source is, so the odds are that he was what would be a pedophile in modern parlance). Basically once she started her period she became free game for him to “engage” with.

In short, his favorite was Aisha and he consummated the marriage when she was 9-ish.

I think JD is interested in accuracy, however, what conventional Muslims believe the answer is reveals a fair amount of their mindset. If conventional Muslims believe that their prophet consummated the marriage at age 9, it says something about the people who believe it and ,by extension, are either ok with it or don’t see enough of a problem with having sexual relations with a 9 year old for it to bother them. If conventional Muslims believe she was 24 years old when the marriage was consummated it takes on a much less creepy set of overtones. In one case, we’d throw him in jail (where he’d probably get killed for being a pedophile; even criminals have a code of conduct) and the other he’d probably be celebrated for being able to bed a hot college aged girl. (Not an easy feat when one is moving into the geriatric years; or so I’m told.)

I just re-read your comment, Terry. It includes avoidable viciousness: “Jacques is not interested in accuracy.” Of course, I am. However, as David points out so well , the historical accuracy of the report is irrelevant to this discussion. What’s relevant is what Muslims think happened to a nine-year, or to an eleven-year old girl, sexually, and that they contemplate with equanimity. Is it really the case that you missed the point?

David could take many of historic figures to court should he apply today’s legal rules. Unless he has full knowledge of the whole Muslim community to be abiding by the ancient rule of marrying their girls by the age of 9, it would be a generalization and unfair judgement. What Mohammad did 1400 years ago was at a time that barbaric societies would burry their new born girls at birth. Islam was the transit station(life or….) until future and education takes it’s course and the conditions improve. It was only 300 years ago in a much more advanced society that children were prosecuted for the crime of witch craft. And today there are men of cloth known to have betrayed the trust of young boys and girls in more than one way and no political incentives are behind the action. There should always be room for individual morality or lack of it and no label should totally be considered Void or evil for the actions of a selected group of people. There is good and bad in every faith and the followers of it. If you know of one that you think is perfect in every way and for every one, be the leader and spread the word. I for one am seeking.

Taleseeker: This is not about good people and bad people, but about a venerated religious leader. It’s also not about “marrying,” that is, contracting a marriage. Rather, as I specified carefully, it’s about “consummating” marriage. That means sex, in this case, sex between a grown man and a girl who is probably physically immature, an especially gruesome kind of rape.

And, we have not begun talking about consent.

If your argument is that what was acceptable a few centuries ago is not acceptable now, so be it. I, speaking for myself, am under the impression that orthodox Muslims want to make the argument that the Prophet Mohammed is a moraL role model for today. Let anyone correct me if am wrong.

Speaking for myself again, I will say that my ancestors were savages until not long ago. I think the last witch was burned alive in France in the early 18th century. It would not cross my mind to take as role models people responsible for such atrocities. And this is not about good people and bad people but about institutions, that which is collectively acceptable or even recommended.

After many exchanges, I don’t know if discussions of these issues take place among Muslims.

One of my non-Muslims friends who lives in a Muslim country pointed out to me recently that the said conversations are easily taking place between people with Muslim-sounding names. Not the same. I am still interested in Muslims’ opinions.

This blog has a fair number of readers from predominantly Muslim countries. I am awaiting their contribution to my education.

Taleseeker, I would advise that you keep in mind that no one of good reputation would venerate individuals who do/have done/are believed to have done such things. I have yet to see Christians/Catholics take one of their abusing priests and make them a moral example to follow. At best they move them to a different parish on the belief that they have repented from their actions (often times mistakenly). At worst, they are charged, put on trial and put in jail. If Jesus/Moses had been reported to or been believed to have consummated a “marriage” when the girl was at the tender age of 9 (or even 11); it would be equally reprehensible. It doesn’t matter whether or not it was an acceptable practice 300 years ago, 500 years ago, or 4000 years ago. Also, keep in mind that I’m not saying that all Muslims are OK pedophilia, but the fact that they make an exception for the main prophet for their religion brings to question (in my mind at least) their moral compass, their critical thinking skills, their decency, and their humanity. If the President of the USA were to have been discovered having sex with a child, his career would be over. And anyone who spent time defending him, try to keep him in office and make him out to be an example to be followed and venerated, it would make perfect sense to question the sanity of those individuals. Does it mean that they’re pedophiles too? Not necessarily, but one would be smart to investigate their background further.

As a complete side note….why in the hell would anyone want to have sex with a girl that young? No curves to speak of…no boobs…no ass…no capacity for enjoyment…really? What fun is that? At least with petite adult females they have the capacity for enjoyment. Another rabbit trail; getting 40 virgins for eternity sounds more like a drag than an incentive for blowing oneself up. Though I’ve never heard it specified that the virgins were female either…maybe they prefer it that way…

David, The unfortunate thing is that most people are born into a faith. It becomes sentimental later. In some islamic countries people don’t even speak the language of Quran and it has not been an educated choice to bear the label, yet it is what their fathers have practiced so they won’t consider name calling a friendly gesture to start a debate with one. I don’t put marriage to a young girl(child) in those times for political reasons in the same category of pedophilia but if a Muslim practices that act today then your name calling is totally accurate. Islam stopped the killing of the female children. That was a good thing. At the time it was an aggressive faith since there were no Plato And Socrates as the targeted audience whom were converted to begin with. That area was not the Cradle of Civilization. We have a presidential candidate that bears a label that allows or allowed some questionable practices. Let’s be fair. You are not comparing apples with apples. And by the way how would you have bribed the tribal men filled with testosterone and ego to do good in this world by avoiding temptation in every way but the heavenly promise
Of being rewarded with a haram of virgins? Have you ever read the Quran?

In my opinion it is irrelevant if someone is born into a religion. If one is an adult member of a religion, one ought to be damn well familiar with what said religion is about, otherwise the adult is being irresponsible. It doesn’t matter if the choice is educated or not. Many are familiar with the internet and all that it provides. There are translations of the Quran in various languages they can utilize. (Wouldn’t it be a bitch if the bible had to be read in Hebrew and Biblical Greek?) Not being literate in the language of the Quran isn’t an excuse for ignorance of Islam for Muslims, anymore than not being able to read the earliest manuscripts of the bible is an excuse for Christians to be ignorant of their holy text. As JD mentioned earlier, it isn’t the political marriage to a child isn’t what is being objected to, it’s the consummation of said marriage that is objected to. I don’t consider Islamic terrorists assaulting one of our embassies and murdering our country men to be a good starting point either, (or flying airplanes into high rise towers in New York) but name calling is much easier to get over. Islam wasn’t born in the “Cradle of Civilization” as you put it, but that’s not an excuse any longer. They’ve had ample time to adjust and become civilized. I think I’m being quite fair. I’m treating them as persons of capable intelligence; not as ignorant children that just need time growing up. IF I were to treat them as ignorant children, then there would be ample reason to advocate Imperialism to help the children “grow up” properly. Just because one grows up as a Muslim doesn’t mean one has an excuse to live in ignorance for the whole of one’s life. Oddly enough, a disturbing number of Muslims believe that the punishment for leaving the religion of Islam ought to be death. And there is a silent majority of Muslims who don’t speak out against that concept. The other major world religions don’t advocate such punishment. In any case I make the only comparisons I can, as there aren’t any other apples to compare with Islam. Only oranges and pears. All of them being generally round fruit. Is it exact? No. But when there aren’t any other apples around, one does the best one can.

If I were trying to persuade tribal leaders to do good back then, I’d carry a bigger stick and threaten worse should they not comply. Then follow through when they didn’t. Once they’re complicit, make it in their self-interest to keep complying. I’m not a prophet nor a god. I’m often quite practical. It’s a hell of a lot easier to threaten people into good behavior than convince them through ethereal after-world rewards into good behavior. I suspect those men knew that experienced women are far more fun in the hay than a virgin. About the only reason for securing a virgin (back then) was to ensure the offspring was yours.

And I have read parts of the Quran, not the whole thing yet. Though it is on my list of books to read.

Taleseeker: I should let David tangle with your intelligent arguments by himself and let him cry alone in a corner but I can’t resist:

Of course, David has not read the Quran. Why should he havewhen the vast majority of Muslims wordl-wide haven’t either? I refer here to a religiously based reluctance to translate the Holy Book and to the ignorance of Arabic among Muslims to which you allude. By the way, it’s probably not in “some Islamic countries” that people don’t know the language ([Arabic, that i). It’s most people in most Islamic countries. Isn’t it true that most people who think of themselves as Muslims merely memorize the Quran phonetically, the way I, for example, would? Isn’t it the case in you own country of origin? (You need not divulge the country to say yes or no.)

Speaking for myself alone: All your points are well taken and credible. They establish better than I could do it that the Prophet’s life ( as distinct from his teachings) has no contemporary moral exemplarity. This is a point of sharp dispute with Islamists. I think, I suspect that most Muslims who are not Islamists are simply vague on the concept. Tell me if I am wrong.

Jaques, I think the Islamists like any fanatic group will use all they can to hold on to the power position that they seem to have established. I would not go as far as saying the rest of Muslims are vague unless you agree that followers of other faiths have the same flaw. Forgive me for repeating myself again, like any other religion there are good points about Islam. The majority of human beings have the need to believe in some superior power. Muslim,Jewish, Christian, even Buddhist for that matter,even though it started by (Buddha) sharing his experiences of sufferings as a human being and no claims of heavenly glories, they have converted him to God. So why not? If It makes people feel connected and not all alone in this Vast Universe so be it. In answer to David I know many Muslims that have converted to other religions and they all are still waking on the face of the earth. I persist on the fact that a whole community should not be blamed for the actions of a few. I don’t think any true religion would promote the attack on America and killing innocent people on 9/11 to make a point. And good luck to David and his bigger stick to get his point across!!! Isn’t that what the Islamist are trying to do?

Alright: One thing at a time: Do you deny that there are countries where conversion to another religion is punishable by the death penalty? It seems to me that’s a “Yes”. “No” question. Do you deny that all such countries are predominantly Muslim (I mean 85% Muslim and up)? Same thing: “Yes,” “No” question.

Second: There have been no suicide bombers who die proclaiming the greater glory of God who did not call themselves Muslims. There had been not a single Hindu fanatic murdering and killing himself in the name of the god Rama, for example.

It would be easy enough to argue that such people do not belong to real Islam. It seems to me that you are not doing this, seeking moral safety instead in generalities. I suspect (forgiving me for this speculation, it’s a little rude) that you confuse your own openness of mind with global Islamic reality.

I am familiar with that position. I have a Muslim friend of several years who tells me that Islamist terrorist are no more her problem than they are mine. It sounds strange to me but it has the merit of clarity.

As an atheist, I’ve thoroughly enjoyed the religion bashing. Keep up the good work. Might I suggest Buddhists as next in line? Think about all those monks with begging bowls. Talk about people who won’t take personal responsibility for their lives, they must make Jacques and the other conservatives just froth at the mouth. But that’s just a suggestion, any ole religion will do.

There are no (NO) recent cases of Buddhists who call themselves Buddhists who have murdered innocent bystanders in the name of Buddhism recently. This fact makes a difference to me. Not to you, Terry?

Close to the year 1,000, your ancestors and mine unleashed a storm of blood and fire on Palestine for no reason the inhabitants, Muslims of Christians, had given them. Their main expressed reason was to “free the tomb of Christ,” who couldn’t possibly have a tomb if you are a Christian.
We shouldn’t be aware of these historical facts? We should say, (with you?): All religions are bad including Buddhism whose adherent’ worst crime is begging?

Like I said any ole religion will do. I’m enjoying the religion bashing but no matter what the dish after you eat it enough times in a row you’re ready for something different. If you don’t want to beat up on the Buddhists how about Hindus? Baha’i?

Jacques, I like Terry’s suggestion. Let’s see if you are fair enough to admit that the crime rate in some Christian countries is a lot higher than those of The Muslim countries. Would that be grounds to call the whole Christian community corrupt and Christianity void? If there is an Islamic country that is killing it’s citizen for the reason of conversion to other faith then we are talking about a very bad government that allows this practice. You might know of a country that does that but would that be a good reason to condemn the whole Muslim community? That is the point that I am trying to make. I happen to be lucky enough to have crossed the path of good people from every faith and none as well. I respect the freedom of choice. And I truly believe if we left religion out of politics the world would be a better place to live in. Islam to me represents a culture mostly. I am not a fan of any extremist belief. Weather it’s Islam or any other faith or political party for that matter. So forgive my rudeness for expressing my view. I am strongly for fairness. Also if there’s a Muslim country that practices capital punishment for religious conversion it is only because the political power lays in the hands of FANATIC Muslims not due to the vote of the nation.
In fact democracy is non existent in most cases. Isn’t that enough punishment for most Muslims?

Taleseeker: Stranger and stranger: There are no Christians who steal cars while shouting “Jesus is great!”

Is it your claim that the fact that Osama Bin Laden presenting himself as an Islamic Superman has nothing to do with Islam? (I refer to his bragging about the suicide bombing of the World Trade Center. )

I don’t know why it’s so difficult to answer simple questions such as this one simply.

Of course, I don’t know comparative crime rates. However, I lived in Morocco for a while. In a completely impressionistic manner, I would have bet that the incidence of serious crime was considerably lower in that country than in the US in general. I would guess a great deal lower. If my guess is correct,this lower incidence of serious crime has a great deal to do with the practice of Islam: The near absence of alcoholic beverages would account for much of the difference. In Santa Cruz, when alcohol was banned on beaches a few years ago, they became safer overnight.

You speak to me as if I had some sort of vested interest in attacking Muslims. Something like the reverse is true: I have known Muslims all my life; I can’t remember a single Muslim I have known whom I didn’t like. This fact dulls my judgment. It makes me reluctant to see the sad reality clearly.

An addition to my previous response, Taleseeker: I believe there is a Grand Canyon of difference between something existing and something not existing. Here is a quiz for you and for prof. Terry. It’s about a true story.

A young woman is found in a car in a sexually compromising position with a young man widely represented as her fiance. She is arrested and taken to the police station. On the way, two of the three arresting policemen rape her. She presses charges. The three policemen are charged with forcible rape and risk severe penalties. The young woman is charged with public indecency and risks six months in jail.

b
And she probably is Muslim too. So whom are we bashing? The victim which represents 80% or more of Islamic population or the other smaller group which is the governing fanatic and barbaric in a sense. Do you really believe that majority of Muslim country’s are O.K. With their government?

Good question. I want to be sure I understand it before I reply. Provisionally: I don’t know what the “majority’ of Muslims (if that’s what you mean) think. I do know that the current government of Tunisia is a product of a popular revolution, that it was not imposed from the outside

We, I, am no bashing anybody. I am interested in the causes of atrocities. Is there a possibility that Islam, the religion, is a cause in the sort of judicial practice to which I refer? Or is it just a coincidence? Would this kind of horror – charging also the rape victim – be just as likely in Lutheran Finland?

Those are serious questions that the reign of political correctness in this country prevents media and academia from discussing. The absence of both leaves the field wide open to narrow, primitive haters who don’t raise questions because they already know the answers.

Please, keep going. You are contributing to my education and perhaps tot hat of some readers.

Jacques, In my opinion when Islam came about, it was the right thing for the people that lived in that region. There are things in almost all the Holy books that could be taken to the point of exaggeration. People should be free to worship whatever appeals to them but countries should not be ruled by any God’s rules. Separation of State and Church is a very healthy foundation for Democracy. Islam does not promote rape but an opportunist Muslim that happens to have police power gets away with a crime without punishment. It is not so much about Islamic rules as it is about political corruption which allows such injustice. In answer to your question(would this happen in Lutheran Finland?) No this would not happen in Finland, not due to the religious belief but due to the fact that Finland is a Democratic republic. Their law serves not only Christians but all the other citizens.

I am not so much sold on the sincerity of Revolutions these days. Are you?

We are pretty much on the same page. I am glad you are not defending the indefensible. Yet: the question remains: Does a particular religion promote a culture capable of specific horrors. Perhaps, you are well placed to deal with this question in connection with Islam. (This exercise has been well done by others in connection with Christianity.)

The Arab Spring has been largely captured by faith-based parties. Some are doing their best to be progressive (in Tunisia, fore example). I dd not expect power to be taken in Egypt by an Arab version of Scandinavian social-democrats. It does not mean that Egyptians should have remained under a military dictatorship forever.. I keep in mind that in Europe, following WWII, parties that called themselves “Christian Democrats” organized the advent of civilized societies.

Social Democrats helped along. The main effort, the main realizations in Germany, France and Italy were achieved by Christian Democrats. That’s good enough since I don’t say, “”only the parties….” Read more carefully and you will learn more.

I have no dog in whatever fight is on your mind, Terry. I am only digging through recent history outside the Middle East to see if I can salvage my hopes for the Arab Spring. It’s tough going.

“I am only digging through recent history outside the Middle East to see if I can salvage my hopes for the Arab Spring. It’s tough going.”

And, unfortunately, it will continue to be tough going. I’m tempted to bring up the American Revolution but, in your honor, let’s talk about the French Revolution. How long did it take to make a transition from a monarchy to a democratic republic? How many lives were lost? What sort of social & economic upheaval had to be endured?

Terry: I agree that the comparison is valid in a rough sort of way. I hope it’s more valid than a comparison would be with the Russian revolutions with their endless cortege of massacres, with their chronic crushing of the human spirit. I am afraid, the latter comparison is more valid because Arab societies, like the Russian society, have experienced no Renaissance and no Enlightenment.

I hope this superficial comparison is completely invalid.

At any rate, I don’t see how one can simply prefer endless despotism to whatever the Arab Spring will eventually bring.

. I have a big essay on Islamism in me but not the courage or the time to write it. I hope someone will beat me to it. I am very disappointed in what I see as the inability of Muslim intellectuals to deal with the topic. Here too, I hope I am wrong and I hope that someone will straighten me out with relevant references.

I have readers from Muslim countries, including some where expressing an opinion is no a ticket to a prison sentence, such as Turkey. They are discouragingly silent.

Dude, there are plenty of Muslim intellectuals who have been writing about and condemning Islamism.

Most, if not all, of them point to the West’s imperialist adventures in Muslim states as the main reason for Islamism’s popular strength. We’ve already been over this. Liberal intellectuals in the Muslim world have repeatedly pleaded with the West to stop supporting imperialist endeavors into their states.

Some of them have even stated that what the West is doing is not imperialistic, but that Islamists nonetheless use Western bombs and Western money funding security apparatuses to further fuel their causes.

Stubborn ignorance for sure! You are right, we have gone over this. You just don’t pay attention.

I don’t hear Muslim intellectuals.

There are two parts to this sentence and two key words: “hear” and “Muslim.” As I have said before, I have a most Christian name* and I m an intellectual of sorts. That does not make me a “Christian intellectual.”

*What could be more Christian “Delacroix,” “of the cross”? And, “Jacques,” “James” was Jesus ‘favorite disciple.

I stopped a long time ago listening to any Third Worlders who blame Western imperialism for the repetitive debacle, for the horrors of their societies. Want to imagine India without British imperialism? It’s easy. It’s called Afghanistan.

By the way, Roman imperialism around 50 BC is not really to blame for the current confusion of Gaul, I mean France!.

PS I would like to learn from you, Brandon, the art of declaring unilaterally that a subject is closed because I won the argument about it a long time ago!